Bush And The Judiciary, What Should Be Next?

PipeLineNews ^ | May 26, 2005 | PipeLineNewsStaff

[johnqueuepublic]

It's time to start looking forward, past the current debacle.

[hobbes1]

These guys arent too bright.

Scalia is pushing 70.


the New CJ, should be Fiftyish.

[woofer2425]

I know I'm not the first one to suggest this...but how about nominating Robert Bork for chief justice. That would tighten some socialist jaws!

[lionheart 247365]

What's next??

What ever it takes to bring on the threat of a filibuster .. .. ..

[recallmccain]

Many conservative Arizona Republicans secretly wish McCain would have been defeated in 2004 but he is too popular with democrats and independents to have had an opponent in the primary.
He is not well liked by the Republican base in Arizona and many would rejoice to a 'Recall McCain' petition, even if unsuccessful.

[recallmccain]

If there are any RECALL McCAIN proponents, I wish they would speak up.

[.cnI redruM]

Let's blow this compromise sky high. By all means, nominate Bork and invoke Reid's filibuster. Let's make the Senate decide how judges should be appointed.

That opens the can of worms the current Senatorial cowards don't want to play with. Then we have to justify why Federal judges are now far too powerful and to politically involved to appoint by the old crony system of Advise and Consent. Then we can get the damage that judicial activism has done to our government entered on the permanent record of congressional debate.

It's only a start, but you can't get anywhere until you take the first step in the right direction.

[ModelBreaker]

nominate Bork and invoke Reid's filibuster

He's too old.

[Redmen4ever]

Speaking of rising stars ... what about ... Ken Starr

[.cnI redruM]

Ok, bring on Estrada.

[iconoclast]

Excellent post.

[deport]

Look for someone off the court to be elevated to Chief Justice of the United States, not someone from on the court. jmo. I'm not sure why so many think of the next Chief Justice as coming from the existing court when history tells us the that only 3 of the 16 Chief Justices have been elevated from an Associate Justice position.

[iconoclast]

nominate Bork and invoke Reid's filibuster

Conservatives had that bite at the apple and f'ed it up supremely (no pun intended).

The greatest failure of the Reagan years?

[iconoclast]

What Should Be Next?

Janice Rogers Brown's nomination, obviously.

[.cnI redruM]

True, but off the topic.

The issue isn't about which person fills which billet. It's about how these billets get filled and what falls under the job description once they get there. The reason this started getting uglier, is because judiciary members, not poets, are becoming the unacknowledged legislators of our government. If that government is to remain an actual representative democracy, their role, succession and some checks on their power have to be intelligently defined.

[ModelBreaker]

Ok, bring on Estrada.

I'm with you there.

[ModelBreaker]

Look for someone off the court to be elevated to Chief Justice of the United States, not someone from on the court. jmo. I'm not sure why so many think of the next Chief Justice as coming from the existing court when history tells us the that only 3 of the 16 Chief Justices have been elevated from an Associate Justice position.

The reason for this is simple. A CJ from off the court is only one nomination battle. I CJ from on the Court is two.

[KOZ.]

estrada might be a great 4th choice. 3 whites get elected without a problem, and the dems block the minority. could be interesting.

[CyberAnt]

IT'S DAMN TIME TO FIGURE OUT THAT THE SENATE DOES NOT KNOW THERE IS A CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - TO WHOM THEY ARE ACCOUNTABLE.

I READ ARTICLE AFTER ARTICLE AFTER ARTICLE - AD NAUSEUM YESTERDAY AND I FOUND ONLY 2 ARTICLES THAT EVEN MENTIONED THE ABUSE TO THE CONSTITUTION BY THE FILIBUSTER OF JUDICIAL NOMINEES.

YES! I'M YELLING - BECAUSE NOBODY SEEMS TO KNOW WHAT THE REAL ARGUMENT AGAINST THE FILIBUSTER OF JUDICIAL NOMINEES IS REALLY ALL ABOUT. IT'S UN-CONSTITUTIONAL!!!!!

It's sickening and disgusting that our own elected officials do not know the filibuster of judicial nominees IS ILLEGAL - AND IT IS AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION TO USE IT - AND IT'S AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION TO HAVE SENATE RULES WHICH URSURP THE POWER OF THE CONSTITUTION.

And .. the unmitigated arrogance of the democrats to DEMAND that Bush CONSULT with them before nominating anyone is just beyond all arrogance I've ever seen.

[RebelBanker]

How about Chief Justice Ann Coulter?